Tread Lightly

[+XMTSpot]

Today on ebay I found a fake birds nest under the search for geocaching.

 

ebay

 

This bothers me. We as Geocachers need to be respecting the environment when we are out doing our thing.

 

Using a fake bird nest for your cache may start people disturbing REAL birds nests looking for a cache somewhere else. (Thinking oh look a birds nest the cache might be in there.)

 

Its just bad training.

 

and thats my .02

[+StarBrand]

I guess nobody should mention the 20 or so caches I have found in old or fake birds nests........

[knowschad]

I found a fake bird's nest cache once. Ever since then, I've had to investigate every fake bird's nest I see. I even found one once that had a fake egg it it! Seriously!

 

 

 

All kidding aside, I see no problem with something like that. I think that most of us can spot the difference... particularily with that crude one that you found on eBay. That one looks more like something created in Basket Weaving 101 than a bird's nest.

 

By the way, you will probably want to avoid the Cool Cache Containers thread, if that bird's nest bothers you.

[+Castle Mischief]

All kidding aside, I see no problem with something like that. I think that most of us can spot the difference... particularly with that crude one that you found on eBay. That one looks more like something created in Basket Weaving 101 than a bird's nest.

 

That was kind of my thinking too.

 

Frankly, it would take some real convincing on part of the hint and the cache description before I started trying to dismantle what I thought was an actual bird nest.

 

The knuckle-heads will always find a time and place to be knuckle-headed and seldom need encouragement.

 

 

I won't ruin the surprise for the OP, but there are many, many other places that small caches are hidden that have been discussed on these forums with your same concerns.

[+bflentje]

If you walk up to a GZ and can't tell the difference between a REAL nest and one that doesn't belong, you probably shouldn't be geocaching.

 

As for respecting the environment... give me a break. God made ME too. All kidding aside, this is NOT a respecting the environment issue.

[+XMTSpot]

If you walk up to a GZ and can't tell the difference between a REAL nest and one that doesn't belong, you probably shouldn't be geocaching.

 

As for respecting the environment... give me a break. God made ME too. All kidding aside, this is NOT a respecting the environment issue.

 

"god made ME too" is the exact human ego that has ruined our planet in the first place.

 

yes I can tell the difference but there are many who cant. Kids who are into caching for example. yes kids should be with parents but sometimes the parents CANT tell the difference or are un educated on how to respect the environment.

 

And if you bflentje don't see this as a environmental issue maybe it is you who should not be geocaching.

[knowschad]

And if you bflentje don't see this as a environmental issue maybe it is you who should not be geocaching.

Add me to your count of those who should perhaps not be geocaching, then.

 

 

These people should NOT be geocaching: -------->

[+StarBrand]

...

"god made ME too" is the exact human ego that has ruined our planet in the first place.

- wow this could lead into a rather long (off topic) discouse - so I choose to just let it go........

 

......

And if you bflentje don't see this as a environmental issue maybe it is you who should not be geocaching.

Add me to the count as well.

[+moparots]

I had a "geo" buddy call me up today and asked if I would help him build a cache hide that involved cutting a hole in a large tree and place on it a bark door of some kind to hide the container. (I have alot of hides that involve hollowedout split logs and tops of stumps cut off ect)

 

I explained to him that wouldnt be a good idea for two reasons, 1 it would probably kill the tree, and 2, most cachers would rip him for cutting into the tree. I convinced him to maybe find a dead tree or stump to do the hide in.

[+XMTSpot]

My original point was that a fake birds nest has the potential to get people into the habit of looking into birds nests.

 

Im sure there are people out there that cant tell or dont know the difference.

 

Most birds will abandon a nest that has a human scent on it. = environmental impact

 

That was my point.

 

If you dont understand then yes you should be on the Not allowed in the woods list

[knowschad]

My original point was that a fake birds nest has the potential to get people into the habit of looking into birds nests.

 

Im sure there are people out there that cant tell or dont know the difference.

 

Most birds will abandon a nest that has a human scent on it. = environmental impact

 

That was my point.

 

If you dont understand then yes you should be on the Not allowed in the woods list

 

 

Nope. Not true. Do some research on it. That is obsolete thinking.

[+flask]

there's kind of a discussion about caches that train people to take apart stuff they shouldn't be taking apart.

 

top of that list is usually fake electrical boxes that are buried among real ones.

 

maybe you can tell the difference, and maybe you can't; some hiders go to great lengths to make their fakes look real, which means if you're finding that cache, you're taking apart something you shouldn't.

 

and that leads to cachers (not all, mind you, but a significant subset) who start taking apart everything when they can't find the cache, which can only lead to tears.

 

it wouldn't hurt people to exercise a little prudence.

 

some people do not possess any prudence and need it exercised for them. if you're hiding a cache try to take into account any damage that would be done if stupid people came to look for it, because i guarantee you that along with everyone else, the stupid people will be out there looking for it, too.

[+Arrow42]

My original point was that a fake birds nest has the potential to get people into the habit of looking into birds nests.

 

That would be the cache-seekers responsibility, not the cache hider's. Blaming the cache-hider is the easy way out and doesn't address the real problem.

[knowschad]

At least we don't generally eat the eggs we find anymore. There was a time, though...

[+bittsen]

there's kind of a discussion about caches that train people to take apart stuff they shouldn't be taking apart.

 

top of that list is usually fake electrical boxes that are buried among real ones.

 

maybe you can tell the difference, and maybe you can't; some hiders go to great lengths to make their fakes look real, which means if you're finding that cache, you're taking apart something you shouldn't.

 

and that leads to cachers (not all, mind you, but a significant subset) who start taking apart everything when they can't find the cache, which can only lead to tears.

 

it wouldn't hurt people to exercise a little prudence.

 

some people do not possess any prudence and need it exercised for them. if you're hiding a cache try to take into account any damage that would be done if stupid people came to look for it, because i guarantee you that along with everyone else, the stupid people will be out there looking for it, too.

 

It's not so much the cachers who take stuff apart that bug me but the ones who don't put the taken apart stuff back together.

I am distressed quite often when I arrive at GZ and see things that were taken apart in an apparant scorched earth search.

 

No, I can't prove it was cachers but, often, the evidence is overwhelming.

[+ironman114]

Yep do some research instead of repeating what someone told you. People with an agenda purposely misrepresent or out right ignore the facts:

 

9. Parent birds will abandon a nestling if it has been touched by humans.

 

This is an amazingly popular myth despite the massive amount of evidence to the contrary. Think about the thousands of studies that involve monitoring nests, weighing and measuring the young. Consider that most of those nests are successful and that the adults return as soon as the intruders are gone. Factor in the millions of baby birds that are banded and fledge successfully. Remember the tens of thousands of bluebird boxes.

 

If birds were repelled by the scent of human beings and fled if their odor appeared on the nest, there would be wholesale abandonment of nests every year. Yet this myth persists, a "truism" handed down from generation to generation. Its origins may lie in the fact that human scent can be disruptive to birds' nesting success. It is not birds, it is mammalian predators that follow scents, and if you approach a nest too often, or too closely, you may well be leading a predator to the site. The next time you visit, the nest will be abandoned. Voila! The birds smelled you and ran.

 

There are very good reasons for staying away from bird nests. Birds may find your intrusiveness offensive for many reasons, but one of them is not the way you smell.

 

Source: [url=http://www.birdwatchersdigest.com/site/backyard_birds/myths

 

Also:

 

No matter how flighty birds appear, they do not readily abandon their young, especially not in response to human touch, says Frank B. Gill, former president of the American Ornithologists' Union. "If a bird's nest is disturbed by a potential predator during the nesting or egg-laying stage," he says, "there's a possibility that [it] will desert and re-nest. However, once the young are hatched and feeding, [their parents are] by and large pretty tenacious."

 

The myth derives from the belief that birds can detect human scent. Actually, birds have relatively small and simple olfactory nerves, which limit their sense of smell. There are very few birds with extraordinary olfaction and these represent specialized adaptations. For example, turkey vultures are attracted to methyl mercaptan, a gas produced by decaying organic matter (and added to natural gas to make it smell bad), while starlings can detect insecticidal compounds in vegetation, which they utilize to keep their nests bug-free. Yet no bird's sense of smell is cued to human scent.

 

If you have an agenda don't make false claims do back up your views.

[+ironman114]

there's kind of a discussion about caches that train people to take apart stuff they shouldn't be taking apart.

 

top of that list is usually fake electrical boxes that are buried among real ones.

 

maybe you can tell the difference, and maybe you can't; some hiders go to great lengths to make their fakes look real, which means if you're finding that cache, you're taking apart something you shouldn't.

 

and that leads to cachers (not all, mind you, but a significant subset) who start taking apart everything when they can't find the cache, which can only lead to tears.

 

it wouldn't hurt people to exercise a little prudence.

 

some people do not possess any prudence and need it exercised for them. if you're hiding a cache try to take into account any damage that would be done if stupid people came to look for it, because i guarantee you that along with everyone else, the stupid people will be out there looking for it, too.

 

It's not so much the cachers who take stuff apart that bug me but the ones who don't put the taken apart stuff back together.

I am distressed quite often when I arrive at GZ and see things that were taken apart in an apparant scorched earth search.

 

No, I can't prove it was cachers but, often, the evidence is overwhelming.

 

I agree with bittsen (see I can find good in nearly everyone )

 

If you can't put it back together then you shouldn't be taking it apart.

[+WRASTRO]

there's kind of a discussion about caches that train people to take apart stuff they shouldn't be taking apart.

 

top of that list is usually fake electrical boxes that are buried among real ones.

 

maybe you can tell the difference, and maybe you can't; some hiders go to great lengths to make their fakes look real, which means if you're finding that cache, you're taking apart something you shouldn't.

 

and that leads to cachers (not all, mind you, but a significant subset) who start taking apart everything when they can't find the cache, which can only lead to tears.

 

it wouldn't hurt people to exercise a little prudence.

 

some people do not possess any prudence and need it exercised for them. if you're hiding a cache try to take into account any damage that would be done if stupid people came to look for it, because i guarantee you that along with everyone else, the stupid people will be out there looking for it, too.

 

It's not so much the cachers who take stuff apart that bug me but the ones who don't put the taken apart stuff back together.

I am distressed quite often when I arrive at GZ and see things that were taken apart in an apparant scorched earth search.

 

No, I can't prove it was cachers but, often, the evidence is overwhelming.

 

I agree with bittsen (see I can find good in nearly everyone )

 

If you can't put it back together then you shouldn't be taking it apart.

I agree with this as well. If you can tell I was at the cache before you I didn't do the job the way I try to.

[+bflentje]

If you walk up to a GZ and can't tell the difference between a REAL nest and one that doesn't belong, you probably shouldn't be geocaching.

 

As for respecting the environment... give me a break. God made ME too. All kidding aside, this is NOT a respecting the environment issue.

 

"god made ME too" is the exact human ego that has ruined our planet in the first place.

 

yes I can tell the difference but there are many who cant. Kids who are into caching for example. yes kids should be with parents but sometimes the parents CANT tell the difference or are un educated on how to respect the environment.

 

And if you bflentje don't see this as a environmental issue maybe it is you who should not be geocaching.

 

I am fascinated in hearing more about how our planet is ruined.. but to be fair, let's keep it local to the United States. I'll be here waiting for your list.

 

I was pheasant hunting in South Dakota last weekend. I was apalled at the amount of debarking those rutting deer were doing to the trees.. damned things should all be rounded up and eliminated from the planet for their ruinous behavior.

Edited November 13, 2009 by bflentje

[+Team Cotati]

Today on ebay I found a fake birds nest under the search for geocaching.

 

ebay

 

This bothers me. We as Geocachers need to be respecting the environment when we are out doing our thing.

 

Using a fake bird nest for your cache may start people disturbing REAL birds nests looking for a cache somewhere else. (Thinking oh look a birds nest the cache might be in there.)

 

Its just bad training.

 

and thats my .02

 

Nice thought. Unfortunately you are about five years too late.

[+Team Cotati]

I found a fake bird's nest cache once. Ever since then, I've had to investigate every fake bird's nest I see. I even found one once that had a fake egg it it! Seriously!

 

 

 

All kidding aside, I see no problem with something like that. I think that most of us can spot the difference... particularily with that crude one that you found on eBay. That one looks more like something created in Basket Weaving 101 than a bird's nest.

 

By the way, you will probably want to avoid the Cool Cache Containers thread, if that bird's nest bothers you.

 

Who is "most of us"? You aren't presuming to speak for the entirety of the geocaching community again, are you?

 

To the OP: You'll soon to learn how to spot a posted truism by simply observing the rush to cover and excuse make. Please do not ever try and make the same argument wrt sprinkler heads or other water distribution equipment, utility company product delivery piping and such.

 

No matter how often you observe damage to the landscaping or components.

 

It is just your imagination and you obviously have some personal axe to grind or have an agenda of the hidden variety, regarding the game of geocaching.

 

Things like you have suggested just never happen and in the very very few instances where they might, are inconsequential.

 

And any ways, non-geocachers cause waaaayyyy more environmental and related damage than real type geocachers. No matter how mainstream geocaching becomes and how many hundreds of thousands or lord knows how many geocache users there might be, they will always and forever be just as responsible as the semi-resident posters in here tell you that they are.

 

My personal advise would be that if you are going to be disturbed over these things and plan on continuing as an active geocacher, when you encounter these issues, and you certainly will, privately inform someone in a position of authority at Groundspeak.

 

Post in here about it? Don't waste your time.

[+Castle Mischief]

Good grief.

 

Are we trying to break records for driving cachers out of the forums these days? Can nobody answer a question without a bucket of bile and sarcasm dumped on top?

[Tahosa and Sons]

That aint as bad as a cache in a cowpie. What some critters leave behind them as they walk.

[+XMTSpot]

Yep do some research instead of repeating what someone told you. People with an agenda purposely misrepresent or out right ignore the facts:

 

9. Parent birds will abandon a nestling if it has been touched by humans.

 

This is an amazingly popular myth despite the massive amount of evidence to the contrary. Think about the thousands of studies that involve monitoring nests, weighing and measuring the young. Consider that most of those nests are successful and that the adults return as soon as the intruders are gone. Factor in the millions of baby birds that are banded and fledge successfully. Remember the tens of thousands of bluebird boxes.

 

If birds were repelled by the scent of human beings and fled if their odor appeared on the nest, there would be wholesale abandonment of nests every year. Yet this myth persists, a "truism" handed down from generation to generation. Its origins may lie in the fact that human scent can be disruptive to birds' nesting success. It is not birds, it is mammalian predators that follow scents, and if you approach a nest too often, or too closely, you may well be leading a predator to the site. The next time you visit, the nest will be abandoned. Voila! The birds smelled you and ran.

 

There are very good reasons for staying away from bird nests. Birds may find your intrusiveness offensive for many reasons, but one of them is not the way you smell.

 

Source: [url=http://www.birdwatchersdigest.com/site/backyard_birds/myths

 

Also:

 

No matter how flighty birds appear, they do not readily abandon their young, especially not in response to human touch, says Frank B. Gill, former president of the American Ornithologists' Union. "If a bird's nest is disturbed by a potential predator during the nesting or egg-laying stage," he says, "there's a possibility that [it] will desert and re-nest. However, once the young are hatched and feeding, [their parents are] by and large pretty tenacious."

 

The myth derives from the belief that birds can detect human scent. Actually, birds have relatively small and simple olfactory nerves, which limit their sense of smell. There are very few birds with extraordinary olfaction and these represent specialized adaptations. For example, turkey vultures are attracted to methyl mercaptan, a gas produced by decaying organic matter (and added to natural gas to make it smell bad), while starlings can detect insecticidal compounds in vegetation, which they utilize to keep their nests bug-free. Yet no bird's sense of smell is cued to human scent.

 

If you have an agenda don't make false claims do back up your views.

 

Agenda? LOL Ya Ok buddy

Try reading YOUR research. I highlighted it in red for you because clearly you didn't read it the first time

[+jellis]

Though this doesn't fall under the eco, but it does for looking for something that is fake. Like sprinklerheads. I have gone to many cache sites where sprinklerheads have been torn apart, the remains spread all over by cachers trying to find a fake one. Especially when we found one that they made to look and feel like a real one.

[knowschad]

All kidding aside, I see no problem with something like that. I think that most of us can spot the difference... particularily with that crude one that you found on eBay. That one looks more like something created in Basket Weaving 101 than a bird's nest.

Who is "most of us"? You aren't presuming to speak for the entirety of the geocaching community again, are you?

No... I'm speaking for most of the geocaching community. Obviously you are one of the exceptions. I also qualified that with "I think". You may have a more pessimistic view of what most of us are capable of.

[+Team Cotati]

And another piece of friendly advice:

 

No matter what, never never ever ask how you might become a Reviewer or Moderator. That too has been known to generate a fair amount of ridicule towards the asker. Sometime when you have some time to kill, just search out THAT special little topic. A forum education in a bottle.

[+Team Birdaholic]

If we are not allowed ot look in birds nests then birds should not be allowed to make a nest on my cache. I

have cache that a bird nests in every year even with people examining the area on a weekly basis. I have a note on the page that you dont have to replace the sticks after searching. Off course the cache is actually on the ground and nowhere near the bird nest' but people still look there first. When there are eggs or chicks then I say on the cache page not to disturb which tells people exactly where it really is.

[+Team Cotati]

All kidding aside, I see no problem with something like that. I think that most of us can spot the difference... particularily with that crude one that you found on eBay. That one looks more like something created in Basket Weaving 101 than a bird's nest.

Who is "most of us"? You aren't presuming to speak for the entirety of the geocaching community again, are you?

No... I'm speaking for most of the geocaching community. Obviously you are one of the exceptions. I also qualified that with "I think". You may have a more pessimistic view of what most of us are capable of.

 

You're right, I do tend to have a more realistic view of such things. And anyone who has been very active in the game of geocaching over the past five years or so knows exactly what I am talking about and in fact have and are observing such issues on an ever increasing basis. Further, it is well known that a main contributor to this is the growth of the game. Growth, while mostly desirable does tend to bring its own special challenges to any enterprise. Geocaching is no different.

 

Things can be done to mitigate the undesirable effects often encountered in rapid growth but you do need to understand the issues and put a plan in place. The desire and motivation to do so would of course be pretty important.....I think.

[+bittsen]

Though this doesn't fall under the eco, but it does for looking for something that is fake. Like sprinklerheads. I have gone to many cache sites where sprinklerheads have been torn apart, the remains spread all over by cachers trying to find a fake one. Especially when we found one that they made to look and feel like a real one.

 

Ditto.

 

It's odd that some can't tell the difference between geocaching and vandalism.

[knowschad]

And anyone who has been very active in the game of geocaching over the past five years or so knows exactly what I am talking about and in fact have and are observing such issues on an ever increasing basis. Further, it is well known that a main contributor to this is the growth of the game. Growth, while mostly desirable does tend to bring its own special challenges to any enterprise. Geocaching is no different.

 

Things can be done to mitigate the undesirable effects often encountered in rapid growth but you do need to understand the issues and put a plan in place. The desire and motivation to do so would of course be pretty important.....I think.

 

I guess I still need to find a few more caches before I achieve your level of perception, but at this point, I have not seen it.

 

Most likely, this discrepency is based on your region having one or two cachers that are destructiive, while my area does not have those (yet, at least, knock on wood!) I think the worst that I've seen around here is leaves or pine needles kicked away from the bases of all the trees around GZ. Personally, I'd rather not even see that, and I do tend to try to fix those areas up while I'm there, but it is scarcely the sort of destruction that you or BIttsen or some of the others have described.

[+Team Cotati]

And anyone who has been very active in the game of geocaching over the past five years or so knows exactly what I am talking about and in fact have and are observing such issues on an ever increasing basis. Further, it is well known that a main contributor to this is the growth of the game. Growth, while mostly desirable does tend to bring its own special challenges to any enterprise. Geocaching is no different.

 

Things can be done to mitigate the undesirable effects often encountered in rapid growth but you do need to understand the issues and put a plan in place. The desire and motivation to do so would of course be pretty important.....I think.

 

I guess I still need to find a few more caches before I achieve your level of perception, but at this point, I have not seen it.

 

Most likely, this discrepency is based on your region having one or two cachers that are destructiive, while my area does not have those (yet, at least, knock on wood!) I think the worst that I've seen around here is leaves or pine needles kicked away from the bases of all the trees around GZ. Personally, I'd rather not even see that, and I do tend to try to fix those areas up while I'm there, but it is scarcely the sort of destruction that you or BIttsen or some of the others have described.

 

No, that's not likely as I have observed this in every region where I have cached.

[knowschad]

No, that's not likely as I have observed this in every region where I have cached.

 

OK... our experiences differ. I can live with that. I guess I'm just lucky, and glad that I haven't encountered it in the two countries and eight states that I've cached in. I'm willing to believe that, for some reason, you are experiencing serious destruction that you believe that you can attribute to geocachers. But since my experience, in those areas that I have cached in, do not agree, then a blanket statement such as "And anyone who has been very active in the game of geocaching over the past five years or so knows exactly what I am talking about " is patently false.

Edited November 15, 2009 by knowschad

[+ironman114]

Yep do some research instead of repeating what someone told you. People with an agenda purposely misrepresent or out right ignore the facts:

 

9. Parent birds will abandon a nestling if it has been touched by humans.

 

This is an amazingly popular myth despite the massive amount of evidence to the contrary. Think about the thousands of studies that involve monitoring nests, weighing and measuring the young. Consider that most of those nests are successful and that the adults return as soon as the intruders are gone. Factor in the millions of baby birds that are banded and fledge successfully. Remember the tens of thousands of bluebird boxes.

 

If birds were repelled by the scent of human beings and fled if their odor appeared on the nest, there would be wholesale abandonment of nests every year. Yet this myth persists, a "truism" handed down from generation to generation. Its origins may lie in the fact that human scent can be disruptive to birds' nesting success. It is not birds, it is mammalian predators that follow scents, (I highlighted the part in blue that you obviously didn't read) and if you approach a nest too often, or too closely, you may well be leading a predator to the site. The next time you visit, the nest will be abandoned. Voila! The birds smelled you and ran.

 

There are very good reasons for staying away from bird nests. Birds may find your intrusiveness offensive for many reasons, but one of them is not the way you smell.

 

Source: [url=http://www.birdwatchersdigest.com/site/backyard_birds/myths

 

Also:

 

No matter how flighty birds appear, they do not readily abandon their young, especially not in response to human touch, says Frank B. Gill, former president of the American Ornithologists' Union. "If a bird's nest is disturbed by a potential predator during the nesting or egg-laying stage," he says, "there's a possibility that [it] will desert and re-nest. However, once the young are hatched and feeding, [their parents are] by and large pretty tenacious."

 

The myth derives from the belief that birds can detect human scent. Actually, birds have relatively small and simple olfactory nerves, which limit their sense of smell. There are very few birds with extraordinary olfaction and these represent specialized adaptations. For example, turkey vultures are attracted to methyl mercaptan, a gas produced by decaying organic matter (and added to natural gas to make it smell bad), while starlings can detect insecticidal compounds in vegetation, which they utilize to keep their nests bug-free. Yet no bird's sense of smell is cued to human scent.

 

If you have an agenda don't make false claims do back up your views.

 

Agenda? LOL Ya Ok buddy

Try reading YOUR research. I highlighted it in red for you because clearly you didn't read it the first time

 

So you can read my mind and know what I have read???? I most certainly DID read that part. I could have edited it out, but chose to leave it. I also left the part about some birds that DO have a sense of smell.

 

XMTSpot

My original point was that a fake birds nest has the potential to get people into the habit of looking into birds nests.

 

Im sure there are people out there that cant tell or dont know the difference.

 

Most birds will abandon a nest that has a human scent on it. = environmental impact

 

That was my point.

 

Again you perpetuate a myth, even after quotes from experts.

 

Yes everything we do impacts the environment. Most of the time the environment recovers.

 

How much damage do geocachers cause by driving their cars and SUVs looking for caches? Especially when trying to do a DeLorme challenge, getting caches in every square of the state map or every county in their state? Your state may be small but many are 4-12 times the size of yours and would consume many gallons of fuel to cover.

 

By the way welcome to geocaching and the forums. You are welcome here even if we disagree with you. I am not trying to chase you away as was posted earlier.

 

You may not have purposely misrepresented the facts or ignored them with your first post. You may well have been well intentioned but misinformed about birds being able to detect human scent.

[knowschad]

I stepped on an ant today while caching. I thought that it was late enough in the season here to safely geocache, but apparently the unseasonable warmth brought a few of those cute little buggers to the surface and because I was not watching for them (due, of course, to my own carelessness), I stepped on one. Maybe even more than one. I may also have bent or even broken some blades of grass, but the worst thing is that I breathed some oxygen and even exhaled some carbon dioxide! Seriously!

 

 

OK, obvious and pretty bad parody, but my point is still real... we can't live on this planet without affecting naturure. Yes, we should be careful when we can... why not? But let's not put ourselves in a position to feel guilt just from breathing, for pete's sake! The birds will survive! Give them more credit than you do!!! Most likely they are English sparrows anyway, which even bird lovers love to kill.

[+ironman114]

I stepped on an ant today while caching. I thought that it was late enough in the season here to safely geocache, but apparently the unseasonable warmth brought a few of those cute little buggers to the surface and because I was not watching for them (due, of course, to my own carelessness), I stepped on one. Maybe even more than one. I may also have bent or even broken some blades of grass, but the worst thing is that I breathed some oxygen and even exhaled some carbon dioxide! Seriously!

 

 

OK, obvious and pretty bad parody, but my point is still real... we can't live on this planet without affecting naturure. Yes, we should be careful when we can... why not? But let's not put ourselves in a position to feel guilt just from breathing, for pete's sake! The birds will survive! Give them more credit than you do!!! Most likely they are English sparrows anyway, which even bird lovers love to kill.

 

Sparrows or starlings? I hadn't heard about a problem with sparrows.

 

 

Ok, after a little research I know you meant sparrow. I am now better educated on pest species that were imported from another continent. We have a similar problem with European starling here.

[+bittsen]

I stepped on an ant today while caching. I thought that it was late enough in the season here to safely geocache, but apparently the unseasonable warmth brought a few of those cute little buggers to the surface and because I was not watching for them (due, of course, to my own carelessness), I stepped on one. Maybe even more than one. I may also have bent or even broken some blades of grass, but the worst thing is that I breathed some oxygen and even exhaled some carbon dioxide! Seriously!

 

 

OK, obvious and pretty bad parody, but my point is still real... we can't live on this planet without affecting naturure. Yes, we should be careful when we can... why not? But let's not put ourselves in a position to feel guilt just from breathing, for pete's sake! The birds will survive! Give them more credit than you do!!! Most likely they are English sparrows anyway, which even bird lovers love to kill.

 

Yes, a bad parody.

 

I believe you are no longer qualified to comment since you admitted to not seeing a problem in your area. I have seen the problem that the OP is suggesting. I have seen lots of situations where it appears cachers did a lot of damage. No, I can't prove it but the evidence is fairly conclusive.

[+KBI]

I believe you are no longer qualified to comment ...

I believe you should not challenge another person's right to express his opinion.

 

I believe you should stick to expressing your own opinion.

[+bittsen]

edit double post

Edited November 15, 2009 by bittsen

[+bittsen]

I believe you are no longer qualified to comment ...

I believe you should not challenge another person's right to express his opinion.

 

I believe you should stick to expressing your own opinion.

 

I believe you should think of what you are about to say and see if it could apply to you before you hit submit.

 

Of course that's not personal against you because I believe everyone should do it.

 

Perhaps the word "qualified" was missed by you. He is fully free to express his opinion. I just don't think anyone who has not experienced a problem is not qualified to comment on the problem. It's sort of like how people who have never had a child should not tell people how to raise a child.

[+KBI]

It's sort of like how people who have never had a child should not tell people how to raise a child.

Maybe, maybe not. But that wasn’t the case here.

 

Nothing about Knowschad or his statements makes him any less "qualified" to express his opinion than you.

 

Knowschad expressed his perfectly valid opinion on 'treading lightly' within nature. You happened to disagree, but instead of merely challenging his statements you chose to challenge his very right to express his statements.

 

That is something I cannot accept. Disagreeing with someone is fine, but don’t tell him his viewpoint has any less right to be posted than yours.

 

I think you owe Knowschad an apology.

[knowschad]

It's sort of like how people who have never had a child should not tell people how to raise a child.

Maybe, maybe not. But that wasn't the case here.

 

Nothing about Knowschad or his statements makes him any less "qualified" to express his opinion than you.

 

Knowschad expressed his perfectly valid opinion on 'treading lightly' within nature. You happened to disagree, but instead of merely challenging his statements you chose to challenge his very right to express his statements.

 

That is something I cannot accept. Disagreeing with someone is fine, but don't tell him his viewpoint has any less right to be posted than yours.

 

I think you owe Knowschad an apology.

Thanks, KBI, but as a moderator, Bittsen had every right to say what he did. Oh, wait... he is NOT a moderator? That's a different story! Nevermind.

[+bittsen]

It's sort of like how people who have never had a child should not tell people how to raise a child.

Maybe, maybe not. But that wasn't the case here.

 

Nothing about Knowschad or his statements makes him any less "qualified" to express his opinion than you.

 

Knowschad expressed his perfectly valid opinion on 'treading lightly' within nature. You happened to disagree, but instead of merely challenging his statements you chose to challenge his very right to express his statements.

 

That is something I cannot accept. Disagreeing with someone is fine, but don't tell him his viewpoint has any less right to be posted than yours.

 

I think you owe Knowschad an apology.

Thanks, KBI, but as a moderator, Bittsen had every right to say what he did. Oh, wait... he is NOT a moderator? That's a different story! Nevermind.

 

Neither are you or KBI, as far as I know.

 

But I stand by what I said. Since you have no experience in the area of subject, you aren't really qualified to give an informed answer.

 

Don't get upset. It's not an insult. It's just an educated opinion.

[knowschad]

[+ironman114]

It's sort of like how people who have never had a child should not tell people how to raise a child.

Maybe, maybe not. But that wasn't the case here.

 

Nothing about Knowschad or his statements makes him any less "qualified" to express his opinion than you.

 

Knowschad expressed his perfectly valid opinion on 'treading lightly' within nature. You happened to disagree, but instead of merely challenging his statements you chose to challenge his very right to express his statements.

 

That is something I cannot accept. Disagreeing with someone is fine, but don't tell him his viewpoint has any less right to be posted than yours.

 

I think you owe Knowschad an apology.

Thanks, KBI, but as a moderator, Bittsen had every right to say what he did. Oh, wait... he is NOT a moderator? That's a different story! Nevermind.

 

Neither are you or KBI, as far as I know.

 

But I stand by what I said. Since you have no experience in the area of subject, you aren't really qualified to give an informed answer.

 

Don't get upset. It's not an insult. It's just an educated opinion.

 

What makes your opinion educated and not his??

 

It is my opinion he offered an opinion not an answer. What was the question he answered to?

 

It is also my opinion you are trying to tell him whether he can post or not. Not whether you think his opinion is valid or not.

 

Stick to offering your opinion and not trying to act like a moderator and tell him whether he can post in this topic.

[+KBI]

It's sort of like how people who have never had a child should not tell people how to raise a child.

Maybe, maybe not. But that wasn't the case here.

 

Nothing about Knowschad or his statements makes him any less "qualified" to express his opinion than you.

 

Knowschad expressed his perfectly valid opinion on 'treading lightly' within nature. You happened to disagree, but instead of merely challenging his statements you chose to challenge his very right to express his statements.

 

That is something I cannot accept. Disagreeing with someone is fine, but don't tell him his viewpoint has any less right to be posted than yours.

 

I think you owe Knowschad an apology.

Thanks, KBI, but as a moderator, Bittsen had every right to say what he did. Oh, wait... he is NOT a moderator? That's a different story! Nevermind.

Neither are you or KBI, as far as I know.

 

But I stand by what I said. Since you have no experience in the area of subject, you aren't really qualified to give an informed answer.

 

Don't get upset. It's not an insult. It's just an educated opinion.

He says he doesn’t see a problem. You say you do. His opinion is based on experience; so, apparently, is yours.

 

So on what grounds do you claim he has "no experience in the area of subject?"

On what grounds do you conclude his opinion is worth any less than yours?

And what makes your opinion more "educated" than his?

 

No, I am not a moderator, but I DO have a 'Report Post' button in front of me – and I have zero patience for anyone who challenges another person’s right to his opinion.

[+KBI]

I still say you owe Knowschad an apology.

[knowschad]

My opinion (loud and clear, as I have every right to do) about this sort of issue, in case it hasn't already been made clear, is that the problem is not the type of cache, but the maturity and possibly the intelligence of the cachers (although I suspect maturity is the major issue). Most of us, I believe, can tell a fake from the real thing. Or perhaps, most of us, as hiders, are not good enough to construct a counterfeit anything that can fool most of us. I have never seen, or personally heard of a cacher tearing apart a real hornet's nest, for instance, just because they found a fake one the week before. I have never heard of a cacher electrocuted because he was examining a real electrical box after finding a real one the week before.

 

 

I could continue, but my point is that most, if not all, of these alarmist posts are generally imaginative, and not for the most part, based on reality. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they are hardly the norm in my experience, and in the experience of my fellow cachers. The destruction of real objects in the pursuit of geocaches hardly tops the topics of conversation at our local events, although certain Oregon cachers certainly may have a different reality.

 

 

My opinion, my experience, my informed answer, loud and clear.

[+bittsen]

I could continue, but my point is that most, if not all, of these alarmist posts are generally imaginative, and not for the most part, based on reality. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they are hardly the norm in my experience, and in the experience of my fellow cachers. The destruction of real objects in the pursuit of geocaches hardly tops the topics of conversation at our local events, although certain Oregon cachers certainly may have a different reality.

 

The topic was not presented at the only regional gathering I attended either. All was positive talk. Why would anyone want to discuss those "bad" cachers? It's not productive since those cachers probably wasn't at the event anyhow.

 

Having said that, I and my caching friend, have both noticed that there is an undue amount of destruction at many GZ locations including, and not limited to, the removal of electrical safety covers.

I have NEVE heard of a cache inside of an aluminum light pole so there should be no reason to remove any of the covers but, often, we find them removed.

Can we PROVE that geocachers did it? Of course we can't but the evidence is overwhelming.

[+KBI]

My opinion (loud and clear, as I have every right to do) about this sort of issue, in case it hasn't already been made clear, is that the problem is not the type of cache, but the maturity and possibly the intelligence of the cachers ...

Agreed.

 

Look at it this way: Someone had to be the very first cacher to think of using a fake bird nest. What do you suppose gave him the idea? I’m betting he spotted a real bird nest one day while searching for another cache, momentarily considered that the nest might be the cache – and an idea was born.

 

Determined cachers will consider all possibilities when seeking well-concealed caches. Even if fake-nest caches were banned outright, that would not stop persistent searchers from inspecting real nests wherever they encounter them.

 

The fake-nest caches aren’t causing problems. As Knowschad points out, all we can do is depend on the judgment of seekers.